We performed a comparison between DX NetOps and ScienceLogic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"It's good for root cause analysis for network problems and network link problems."
"I like that it provides an overall view of our network. From the topology view to every event, we can view it. We can also see the interface utilization for future capacity planning. It fits our use case and environment."
"The solution is stable."
"It is straightforward to configure, and you can quickly gather data from your infrastructure."
"A highly scalable solution."
"The AI is the best feature in this solution."
"Best feature of all is detailed monitoring of services, processes, ports and SSL certificates and or web content."
"It is simple."
"The most valuable features of ScienceLogic are AI and machine learning."
"I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"When it comes to features, the power pack is the most valuable."
"ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"Power packs."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The hardware requirements can be improved."
"It would be better if they had an NFA network analysis feature. We appreciate features like extended network security for bucket flows, but it would be better to have some IDs, IPS functionalities, DDoS, or something like that."
"Technical support could be more responsive."
"Technical support needs to be better. They need to be more knowledgeable and responsive."
"One improvement that could make the product better is to streamline its modules into a more cohesive solution."
"Lacks dashboards and better integration with other solutions."
"The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"They should add CLI command modes and scripts for high performance."
"They need a little more self-service."
"ScienceLogic does not have application monitoring. We definitely need something integrated within ScienceLogic to monitor applications so that we don't have to rely on monitoring tools to monitor other applications. At least the ones that are market leaders, such as SAP, Oracle, and others."
"The product is not user-friendly."
"ScienceLogic should provide detailed documents to customer as the current documents are not sufficient."
"They should improve database issues in HA and Failover mode, and provide documentation for all users , even if they are not customers."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
DX NetOps is ranked 30th in Network Monitoring Software with 6 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 14th in Network Monitoring Software with 42 reviews. DX NetOps is rated 8.6, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of DX NetOps writes "Good performance, simple setup, and helpful for root cause analysis". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". DX NetOps is most compared with DX Spectrum, SolarWinds NPM, AppNeta by Broadcom, PRTG Network Monitor and IBM SevOne Network Performance Management (NPM), whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and Zabbix. See our DX NetOps vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors and best AIOps vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.